A door, opening, or portal between defined areas address the human need to satisfy different human concerns. For instance, the human concerns that are satisfied in a designated area called a bathroom are different than the concerns satisfied by an area defined by the term “kitchen”, “bedroom,” etc. The commonality of concerns that are satisfied in a particular designated space create common designations such as loading dock, fire station, garage entrance or garage exit, etc. Each designated space and its possibility of satisfaction of the concerns it is designed to address has within its possibilities inherent transparent functionality and the possibility for breakdown and malfunction where operational transparency breaks down.
To a great degree the transparent functionality of a designated space as well as the breakdown of the transparency is predictable. Because both transparency and breakdown are predictable to masterful practitioners who utilize the space, tools can be created to help manage the inevitable predictable outcomes. Furthermore, often there are multiple practitioners who utilize a space. The tools can then be designed to satisfy the concerns of different groups of practitioners. Typically, specialized tools have evolved separately to satisfy different concerns. The art of successful integration then is developing tools that satisfy concerns across a wide network of practitioners who operate in a defined space.
In previous applications and issued patents by this inventor, there has been examined a building's garage portal as an example of an opportunity to address multiple concerns for a designated space.
A specific area of interest is, for example, the shipping industry. Here there are a myriad of participants, each with their individual and sometimes overlapping concerns. Security officers deal with theft, service technicians deal with dock equipment malfunctions, shipping schedulers manage the details of shipping and deal with the logistics of moving packages and items, the public including those ordering goods wish to know where their shipment is, and dock personnel load, unload and sometimes lose or even damage goods they are handling. Systems such as bar code or RFID technology have evolved to track shipments, GPS to track the trucks, and access cards and secure locked and gated areas have evolved to address particular concerns of the participants noted above.
That is, individual and piecemeal solutions have been provided to deal with the individual concerns of the individuals mentioned above. Once any malfunction, error, mishap, theft, vandalism, crime, or other unusual event occurs, it is not possible to successfully reconstruct the available information in a readily useful and readily available form as the information is often located on different platforms that have evolved to address the different domains of concern.
The problem with the individual approach to solutions is that it lacks the coherency and advantages that might be available in well-conceived inventive integrated solutions. For instances of such piecemeal solutions, as a first example, the safety eye on the dock bay door that is designed to address door safety issues is not integrated into the camera system. A video recorder might take pictures based on motion or may constantly be generating mountains of useless data that has to be examined at length if a breakdown is identified.
In a second example, a shipment security officer is interested in the integrity of the shipments. Typically, the shipping terminal puts a device called a security seal that cannot be removed without its destruction, and which is installed on the truck doors in addition to a removable lock. However, there is no associated data when such security seal is broken, and thus the value of the security seal is limited. The safety eye on the dock door does not activate the cameras and there is no touch pad screen on a portal manager on which to enter the employee ID and security tag number that can track the event of opening the cargo door or an APP on a smartphone that connects the shipment and terminal to a video of the seal breaking.
Turning attention to the fire station industry, here there can be a myriad of participants, each with their individual and sometimes overlapping concerns. Security officers deal with equipment theft and station security, service technicians deal with door and fire equipment malfunction, dispatch schedulers deal with the assigning equipment to various alarms; the public may show up at stations randomly, and fire station personnel must be trained, managed and their presence recorded for payroll and assignment functions. Thieves and rogue employees might steal from unattended firehouses when personnel are responding to alarms and emergencies. Various piecemeal solutions to such concerns include systems such GPS to track the trucks, access cards issued to fire personal to record or control access, doors which may be transmitter controlled, and secure areas within the station can be locked and/or gated. Video recorders and security alarm systems may be installed to record ongoing activities. However, this information is not accessible by event, and is not readily available for checking by managers or supervisors in a manner that gathers all available data into a conveniently accessible form.
As a third example of a need in the prior art, the safety eye on the station bay door that is designed to address door safety issues is not integrated into the camera system or intruder detection system. A video recorder might take pictures based on motion or is constantly generating mountains of useless data that has to be looked at if an intrusion event is identified. Other information is similarly useless, and is often unrecorded and unavailable after the fact.
As a fourth example of a need in the prior art, an outside safety loop that holds a portal door open against its timeout is not integrated into a system where the system can notify an administrator that a vehicle is blocking the exit door to the fire station, parking garage, etc. or that someone is loitering outside a portal as detected by a motion/presence detector and a message is not currently sent to a guard or security officer and in high security cases actually block the portal door from opening. There is in the prior art no way to define high, medium or low security run profiles that defines different operational formats under different security threat levels or time periods.
As a fifth example of a need in the prior art, a camera that is constantly recording will not allow individual frames to be associated with specific events. Station bay doors typically can open on individual ceiling pull command, by push button station either at the door or at the station manager desk and or on “alarm.” The doors will then often close on timer command after the fire vehicle has exited. Not uncommon is the circumstance where the safety eye is blocked, safety loop malfunctions or other event occurs where the door fails to close which leaves the station open and vulnerable to theft and vandalism. There exists a need to set an alert parameter to email, text message, or otherwise alert a fire station or security officer that a door has failed to close so specific action can be taken to address the problem.
As a sixth example of a need in the prior art, in existing rental car facility arrangements, rental cars exit the rental lot by a typical system having a barrier gate (e.g., a gate arm, “tiger teeth” plate barrier, or similar devices or combination) which is opened by an employee checking the contract and documents at the gate, or by a ticket issued at the counter which allows a single use within a determined time window through an un-manned gate. Also typically seen in such existing rental car facilities are CCTV cameras at various locations around the exit which record 24/7 to a VCR or hard-drive based recording system, with no correlation between the “event” (car exiting) and the recording. Current systems to monitor vehicle condition is handwritten notes on the contract or a small paper card on which the agent or renter marks the approximate location of any damage.
Any missed damage at checkout leads to either trying to prove when damage occurred, dealing with customers trying to pass off damage caused while the car was in their possession as “not their fault”, or, in the absence of any proof, paying for the repair out of profits.
Another problem is outright theft of vehicles. Boards can be placed over tiger teeth and driven over, exit personnel (sometimes third-party hired guards) might be “in on it” and open the gate, or leave their post at a certain time. Equipment breakdowns that have not been noticed yet leave gaps in the security envelope around the lot.
The gate equipment is subject to tremendous stress due to the high volume of vehicles exiting through an exit typically having one to three lanes. Many locations clear hundreds of rental cars per day. In addition, shuttle buses, car carriers, tow trucks, and delivery trucks require special consideration regarding the exiting sequence to prevent damage to the equipment or vehicle.
A seventh example involves the camping industry. KOA and other campgrounds typically control access to the campground and its amenities which can include swimming pools, gyms, tennis courts, hiking trails, lake beaches, etc. by issuing a vehicle access card to the camping “family”. It is not uncommon for the access cardholder to pass the card to a “friend” who can then drive into the campground and enjoy its amenities for free or instruct the “friend” to follow closely and tailgate into the campground. The campground owner loses revenue and provides “free” services. What is needed is a combined access card, gate control and camera image system to event log the coming and goings of the cardholders. Since the card is associated with a particular vehicle, an event log that combines card usage data, single use or tailgate signal data and image data into an event log would allow campground personnel to easily spot the cheaters and trespassers.
Access Control
The traditional pathway into a facility for over a millennium has been by inserting a “key” into a lock of some type that allows a door or barrier to be opened if the key “fits”. Although the lock industry has evolved over the years to many different types, the traditional lock and key remains the essential components.
More recently, “key” card access systems have become commonplace where the card is read electronically and if the card is in the “authorized” (it fits) category of the database, a signal is sent to release a latch or bolt or open a motorized door/gate/barrier.
Biometric systems read fingerprint or eye scan data into a system where an analysis against a preauthorized database allows or disallows access. The biometric data (key) has to fit the database (lock).
Each of these systems has their own histories of capabilities and costs required to construct and maintain the system. Biometric systems, although proven to create a more secure system, have a much greater cost to construct and administer. In all these systems, the “user” is he who possesses the “key.” “Security” is determined by possession or loss thereof and the robustness (pick proof capability) of the mechanism.
The problem arises when numerous persons need access to multiple doors or entry points in numerous buildings and/or numerous locations in a facility. Keeping inventory and security over hundreds or keys or key access cards and knowing where they fit becomes an overwhelming—and therefore expensive—management problem. The popular TV show in the 80's One Day at a Time showed the building engineer/maintenance man “Snyder” with a ring of what could have been over 50 keys. In reality, the problem is even greater when there is a roving maintenance team responsible for numerous buildings such as truck maintenance and garage facilities for a company such as Verizon, for example, or any other organization with numerous and scattered facilities. Additionally, if the keys or keycards are lost or stolen, security is compromised and it can cost many thousands of dollars in lock replacement and access card reprogramming costs. The cost of biometric solutions mentioned above makes this solution impractical in many applications.
In an issued U.S. Pat. No. 6,945,303 to Martin H. Weik III, one of the inventors of the subject application, as well as in pending U.S. Ser. No. 61/575,833 filed on Aug. 29, 2011, pending Ser. No. 12/930,437 filed on Jan. 6, 2011, and pending Ser. No. 13/134,698 filed on Jun. 14, 2011, there is shown an access system based on a credit card, driver's license or other ID with readable media that would normally be carried by the user which would be read into a system at a point of authorization that would allow access at other points. The readable media was the “key” inserted into the system database “lock”. In the aforementioned application U.S. Ser. No. 13/134,698 this inventor disclosed an access system that was internet based and included an event logging system to include the capture of video, access card and door subsystem event data into a single, accessible database to include a task management event logger to aid in facility management. This application expands on and combines these inventions to allow a device “normally carried by a user” (a cell phone) to be the interface device that allows the user to access a single or plurality of access points in single or a plurality of access points without the need to carry inventory and keep secure numerous keys or access cards.